Media Matters on media decline in Climate Change coverage

[LongTomH]

As the evidence comes in that both temperatures and ocean levels are rising, electronic media coverage of the issue is actually declining. Media Matters did an analysis of media coverage of the issue in early March:

Combined Climate Coverage On ABC, CBS, NBC, And Fox Decreased Five Percent From 2014 To 2015, Despite Landmark Actions To Address Global Warming. In 2015, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox collectively aired approximately 146 minutes of climate change coverage on their evening and Sunday news shows, which was eight minutes less than the networks aired in 2014. This five percent drop in coverage occurred even though 2015 was a year full of significant actions to address climate change, including the EPA finalizing the Clean Power Plan, the first-ever federal limits on carbon pollution from power plants; President Obama rejecting the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, citing the need to fight climate change; Pope Francis releasing the first-ever papal encyclical on climate change; and leaders from 195 countries agreeing to a landmark accord to lower greenhouse gas emissions at the United Nations climate summit in Paris.

Now, they're getting a response from congresspeople, scientists and environmental activists: "A Travesty of Journalism": Experts React to Broadcast Networks Decline in Climate Change Coverage:

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI): "In a year when nearly 200 countries around the world collectively recognized the threat of climate change and the United States made historic commitments to cut carbon pollution, major networks actually cut their media coverage of climate change. In 2015, the network Sunday shows devoted just 73 minutes to climate change, a ten percent decrease from the year before. What makes these findings even more troubling is the fact that with the little time devoted to climate change, these Sunday shows continued to mislead their audiences by including climate denial as part of the discussion. The facts are clear. Scientists, governments, and major corporations around the world have accepted the facts about climate change and are having real debates on solutions. In this consequential election year, it's time for news broadcasters to do the same."

Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY): "As the co-founder of the House Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition, I read Media Matters' new study and it's a wake up call to the news networks. The most important long term global and national issue shouldn't be getting short-thrift. People need more information, not less."

Michael Mann, climate scientist at Penn State University: "It is unconscionable that so many purportedly mainstream media outlets continue to misinform the public when it comes to the matter of human-caused climate change. History will not look back kindly upon television news networks that had an opportunity to inform the public about this existential threat, and instead chose to serve as willing mouthpieces for denialist fossil fuel interests."

Kevin Trenberth, climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research: "These results are disturbing. ... It is evident that the networks are gun shy about climate change, most likely because advertisers demand it. It is a very sad state of affairs that the science of climate change and the continuing evidence about it is hidden from listeners. What is done about the problem should be a separate matter entirely from whether we have a problem. Climate change is already with us and is causing mostly adverse effects every day, but the public is not well informed."

In Kim Stanley Robinson's novel: 2312, our present era is referred to as "The Dithering," in reference to our lack of response to the climate change threat.

[femmedem]

1. The media doesn't like to report on it because it's a bummer. People don't like to hear about it.

But the bigger bummer will be when catastrophic climate change is upon us.

[dembotoz]

2. if it bleeds it leads guess we need more disasters to happen stateside